by T. Stanfill Benns | Aug 22, 2024 | New Blog
+Feast of the Immaculate Heart of Mary+
Sweet Heart of Mary, be my salvation!
In my early 20s, I read a book that later would send me indirectly to the doors of Traditional “Catholicism.” That book was None Dare Call it Conspiracy, by Gary Allen. It helped me make sense of a world that was suffering a moral and religious crisis at the time, a crisis that officially began with usurpation of the throne of St. Peter but had actually been in the making for over a century. When I discovered that the Church I was baptized in, the one I had left after the institution of the Novus Ordo Missae, was being “revived” by Traditionalists, I investigated them. It was then I discovered this particular sect supported a right-wing group whose philosophy was based on Allen’s book, and everything seemed to finally come into focus. I became a member of the Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement headed by Fr. Francis E. Fenton and briefly, the John Birch Society.
Four years spent in the movement, after writing for four Traditionalist publications, I realized that the goal of all these interrelated but separate sects was to maintain the status quo, not move forward to advocate for doctrinal unity which could be had only by electing a true pope. I resigned membership in the Birch society in 1982 and was done with the ORCM by 1983. I began actively advocating for a papal election in 1986-87. Readers know the rest. I have since discovered and exposed the founding and infiltration of the Traditionalist movement by Freemasons, and recently a reader has kindly advanced my knowledge regarding the Birch Society’s role in that infiltration. It further strengthens what is written HERE regarding Traditionalism’s Masonic origins and should leave Catholics with no doubt regarding the true motives and intent of LibTrad pseudo-clergy.
In that article I wrote: “Early in the Traditionalist game (1975), Catholic writer William Strojie, in his Letters, commented on De Pauw’s beliefs and affiliations and found them wanting. Strojie and Mary Lejeune, who wrote Sword of Truth were apparently the first among writers at the time to link DePauw’s Catholic Traditionalist Movement (CTM) to the Old Catholics and Gnostics. They also identified Fr. Francis E. Fenton’s John Birch Society-affiliated Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement (ORCM) as not only linked to the Old Catholics, but also to the Americanists, (the initials for the Old Roman Catholic Church are ORCC and Fenton’s group functioned in the U.S. much as that church functions both in Britain and here).”
What Lejeune and Strojie didn’t know is that the John Birch Society’s own council members directing the society were peppered with Freemasons and Communist sympathizers. This is confirmed by former JBS members in the article found HERE. Much of the information comes from Who’s Who in America and other sources. Below the implications of this find will be discussed.
Masonic Birchers, their associates and British Israel
Most interesting about the Birch expose article is that it lists as one of their council members a Dr. [John] Grady, founder of the Shickshinny Knights (Sovereign Order of St. John of Jerusalem, SOSJ) but does not refer to his Masonic membership in this order. The Shickshinny Knights were taken to court and denounced as a legitimate order. They also were investigated by the FBI for neo-Nazi and terrorist-type connections in the 1990s (https://barthsnotes.com/2012/05/24/patcon-and-the-investigation-of-a-sovereign-order/). Wikipedia rightly reports that Fr. Fenton founded the ORCM on the suggestion of and with the support of Rev. Joaquin Saenz- Arriaga, a Mexican canonist and theologian. The translator for Arriaga’s work frankly admits, in a dedication for The New Montinian Church, that Arriaga was a member of the Order of St. John Jerusalem, an order that also tracks back to Marcel Lefebvre. Below is the preface to Saenz-Arriaga’s book.
TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE
“Fr. Joaquín Sáenz y Arriaga, S.J., Ph.D. was born October 12, 1899, ordained a Jesuit priest in April, 1930, and died in April, 1976. An acclaimed sentinel and guardian of the Rock of St. Peter, he held doctorates in philosophy, theology and Canon Law. An active and prodigious traditionalist writer, he authored or co-authored more than fifty books exposing the neo-gnosticism of the Post-Conciliar Church, including such well-known texts as Sede Vacante (The Vacant Chair), For Christ and Against Christ, The New Mass Is Not the One Catholic Mass, The Plot Against the Church, etc. A dedicated servant of Christ, his love of God and mankind propelled him to write the present comprehensive expose against the occult conspiracy. A shining star of the Jesuit Order and the Order of Saint John of Jerusalem, he first published La Nueva Iglesia Montiniana on the Feast of the Assumption, August 15, 1971. This was subsequently translated and published in Italian, creating such a furor within liberalized Church circles that it even brought about an invalid excommunication, handed down by a bishop who did not have jurisdiction over Fr. Saenz and who did not call a tribunal to hear the case. It is hoped that the timely and long-awaited publication of this book on August 15, 1985 will provide the reader with enough historical insight to appreciate the nature of the pagan anti-Christian conspiracy which is at work against the Church.”
It should be no surprise, then, that Fenton himself was a member of the same organization on which Grady also sat as a council member, or that Saenz-Arriaga was a member of Grady’s Shickshinny Knights. “Fr.” Dan Jones, an ORCM pseudo-cleric, regularly promoted Grady’s side organization, the American Pistol and Rifle Association, and recruited Traditionalists for membership in the group. Jones also openly promoted British Israel ideology in his Sangre de Cristo Newsnotes. He would later embrace a schismatic alternative-pope group in Canada condemned by Pope Pius XII.
Although not a council member, another possible Masonic connection was Kennett Bawden, father of David Bawden, aka “Pope Michael.” According to family members, the elder Bawden left the Masons on embracing the Catholic faith, sometime in the 1960s, 1970s. During his time as a member of the St. Pius X Society and for some time afterward, Kennett Bawden was a public relations agent for the Kansas branch of the JBS (1970s, 1980s). His 1995 obituary lists him as “a lifetime member” of the JBS. He was the main funder and promoter of his son David’s 1990 “election.”
H.M. Peters on the JBS and British Israel
British Israel is treated in various articles on this site and is one of the lower rungs of Freemasonry listed on Lady Queenborough’s Masonic pyramid. The authors of the JBS article mention Protestant author and researcher, Helen M. Peters, in their work and her reference to the philosophy of the JBS as definitely supporting British Israel. Peters is quoted at length in the treatise HERE on the history of British Israelism, which the article on the Masonic origins of Traditionalism mentioned above links to the Birch Society and Traditionalists. She doesn’t expose the JBS, founded by Robert Welch, as infiltrated by Freemasons, but she definitely provides the spiritual link that places them in the service of the One World religion architects. Peters writes:
“This one “link” is all important because it not only ties in the conservative and Identity Movements, it links them with the Jew’s religion which the Identity people promote as the Kingdom Message. The Identity people are bastard offspring of Judaism because their belief in the earthly kingdom is Judaism.
“The John Birch Society has been a thorn in the flesh of many would-be patriots. The purpose of the John Birch Society is to soak up any effective opposition and neutralize it or turn it toward a false conservatism. Robert Welch and his Society has never attacked the Kingdom Message propaganda. In fact they promote British Israel under the cover of Fundamental Christianity. “Welch laid to rest any questions on British Israel to his members in his booklet THE NEUTRALIZERS. We say that he who does not want the whole truth does not deserve any truth. With this in mind let us take a close look at Welch’s double talk in his phony expose` of British Israel. He simply attacks it by one name and promotes it under another.
“THE NEUTRALIZERS is a booklet distributed by the John Birch Society. Its purpose, according to its author, is to “minimize the effect of the whole splintering (efforts to destroy the John Birch Society) operation.” According to Robert Welch none of his members are supposed to believe any bad stories about himself or his society unless they first check with headquarters in Belmont, Massachusetts. This, most of them dutifully do.
“If through guile, one wishes to twist men’s minds, it is necessary to be compassionate, sincere, religious and, in this case, patriotic. These qualities of character cause an unfaltering admiration, stupefying followers and “neutralizing” opponents. The way for a villain to disguise his crime is to implicate it to others, blaming them for that which he is guilty.
“THE NEUTRALIZERS is a case in point. If we suppose that Mr. Welch has a valid attack upon advocates of “Anti-Semitism,” “Religious Neutralism,” “Academic Neutralism,” “Political Neutralism,” and “Tangentitis,” we have a right to examine him and his Society with regard to the same topics. (We have not checked with Belmont but we will go ahead.) As Mr. Welch so powerfully stated, on page 39 of THE NEUTRALIZERS, “Consistency is seldom a virtue of the bigot.” End quote. With this we agree and with this in mind we turn the spotlight upon Mr. Welch and his “Anti-Communist John Birch Society.”
“In the first section of THE NEUTRALIZERS on “Anti-Semitism” the term anti-Semitism is used twelve times. This of course injects the revolutionary tactic of racism because of the commonly false definition put upon the word “Semitic.” With all the knowledge that Sir Robert possesses he cannot prove that there is a Semitic Race, let alone that the Jews are Semites. His genealogical proof of a Semitic Race today is as impossible as is any British Israelite’s racial identity. Racial lineage dating back to any of the tribes of Israel was forever destroyed when the genealogical tablets were destroyed with the Jewish Temple in 70 A.D. The error of “Jewish Semitism” is as erroneous as the error of “Arab Semitism.” But of course the idea of race helps promote conflict and revolution.
“Then with the gall of a brass monkey he equates religion with race in order to confuse the two. On page 8 he suggests that “Jews” are sometimes “Jews” and sometimes not — “but those who had formerly been Jews and many who had not been Jews.” End quote. So Welch says on page 18 that the Communists do the “opposite of the appearance that they create so diligently.” Is he not here following the same pattern of using racism (semitism) to promote revolution?
“Then like all good Masons do, he equates all religions to one big happy family. On page 20 he states that Communism must go “so that Jews and Christians alike, and Mohammedans and Buddhists, can again have a decent world to live in.” End of quote. Now be not deceived that his plan graciously allows Christianity a fourth part with the heathens. His definition of Christianity is British Israel and is not based on the Deity of Jesus Christ at all… Mr. Welch and all the Right-Wing Communists say the bad guys are in the Kremlin. They are bad all right because they are controlled by the same British Israel that controls Mr. Welch. The only thing is, their left-wing Communism is going to give way to Mr. Welch’s “Christian Communism” (https://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/hoax/unionjack_epilogue.htm).
Is that not precisely where we are headed in this coming election? And is this not reflected in the establishment of the Abrahamic Family House celebrating all three world religions, the Satanic result of indifferentism, pan-Christianism, Modernism, ecumenism and the religious liberty espoused at the false Vatican 2 council?
Replacement theology and conversion
Right-wing Christian fundamentalism, as explained by Peters above in the link on British Israel, rebuffs the idea of a “replacement theology,” or supersessionism. This term is defined by one Protestant writer as: “The animosity even some Christians have toward the Jewish people. They choose to believe in the Replacement Theology that ‘essentially teaches that the church has replaced Israel in God’s plan. Adherents of the Replacement Theology believe the Jews are no longer God’s chosen people, and God does not have specific future plans for the nation of Israel.’” Romans 11: 28-31 is quoted to support the restoration of Israel: “As concerning the gospel, indeed, they are enemies for your sake: but as touching the election, they are most dear for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are without repentance. For as you also in times past did not believe God, but now have obtained mercy, through their unbelief; So these also now have not believed, for your mercy, that they also may obtain mercy. For God hath concluded all in unbelief, that he may have mercy on all.”
Rev. Leo Haydock, however, interprets this as follows: “They are… enemies to God, for He has rejected them at presentfor their willful blindness…” Typically, this Protestant neglects to refer to the preceding verses, Rom. 11:25-27: “For I would not have you ignorant, brethren, of this mystery, (lest you should be wise in your own conceits), that blindness in part has happened in Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles should come in. And so all Israel should be saved, as it is written: ‘There shall come out of Sion, he that shall deliver, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob. And this is to them my covenant: when I shall take away their sins’.” Rev. Haydock comments: “All Israel shall be saved when all nations are converted [and] they [the Jews] submit to the faith of Christ… Christ Jesus shall then come to them by His powerful grace, ‘And this is to them my covenant… [when I shall take away their sins’”].
And then we find this verse: in 2 Corin. 3 vs 13-16: “And not as Moses put a veil upon his face, that the children of Israel might not steadfastly look on the face of that which is made void. But their senses were made dull. For, until this present day, the selfsame veil, in the reading of the Old Testament, remaineth not taken away (because in Christ it is made void). But even until this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart. But when they shall be converted to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away.” Let them once convert and THEN the promises will be fulfilled, in the establishment of the heavenly New Jerusalem, as the Good Book teaches. This conversion very likely already happened in part, as reported in the article cited previously on the lost Jewish tribes. But toward the very end, before the consummation of the world by fire and after the terrible chastisement and destruction of Rome, time will be given for the remaining Jews to convert, as well as “The Synagogue of Satan…those who say they are Jews and are not but do lie. I will make them to come and adore before thy feet” (Apoc. 3:9).
Who is this synagogue? As Msgr. Jouin reports in his booklet on Freemasonry: “The renewed sentences of anathema by Pope Pius IX strike most particularly the satanism of secret societies. In his Encyclical of November 2l, 1873, the Pope writes of them as ‘the synagogue of Satan.” So is Freemasonry, aligned at the top with certain Jewish entities, those of whom this pope speaks, the ones now promoting British Israel? Or is he referring to the fact that the Jews as a race have ceased to exist, since all their genealogies were lost with the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D., and by their dispersion among the nations. This is even taught by Jewish historians and converts from Judaism. What must Catholics believe about replacement theology, now so popular among Fundamentalists? Surely it cannot be called animosity, for Catholics are not anti-Semites. We wish to take nothing from the Jews that belongs to them, only enrich them with the acceptance of the Messiah that they mistakenly rejected so long ago. Then indeed all the promises made to them will be fulfilled. These are not our terms, but the terms of their God.
Rev. Denis Fahey reports that Pope Pius XI, in his Sept. 6, 1938, address to Belgian pilgrims wrote: “At the most solemn moment of the Mass we recite the prayer which contains the expression “sacrifice of Abel, sacrifice of Abraham, sacrifice of Melchisedek” in three strokes, three times, three steps, the entire religious history of mankind—a magnificent passage. Every time we read it; we are seized by an irresistible emotion. The sacrifice of our patriarch Abraham. Note that Abraham is called our patriarch, our ancestor. Antisemitism is incompatible with the thought and the sublime reality expressed in this text. It is alien to us, a movement in which we Christians can have no part. The promise was made to Abraham and to his descendants. It is realized in Christ, and through Christ in us who are members of His Mystical Body. Through Christ and in Christ we are the spiritual descendants of Abraham. No, it is not possible for Christians to take part in antisemitism. We acknowledge for all the right to defend themselves, to adopt measures of protection against what threatens their legitimate interests. But antisemitism is inadmissible. Spiritually, we are Semites.”
It is the British Israel adherents, among them Traditionalists, who expect a millennium and the restoration of Christ’s Church on earth. Traditionalists believe they will be the beneficiaries of this restoration and Fundamentalists believe it will be a Jewish operation that will somehow include Christians, but they are not in agreement on the extent or timing of this involvement. Millenarianism, even in its mildest, spiritual sense, has been condemned by Pope Pius XII and this is explained HERE. The thousand-year reign probably began after the papacy was firmly established in Rome once the major persecutions of Christians subsided. In 445, Emperor Valentinian pronounced that the Bishop of Rome was the law for all. Pope Gelasius I was the first pope to be called Vicar of Christ (492-496). A little over 1,000 years later, Luther began his revolt, followed by that of Henry VIII around 1532. Freemasonry was established in England 200 years after Luther’s revolt.
Conclusion
LibTrads no longer can defend the fraudulent and apostate foundations of their “church.” As documented in the Masonic origins article, The Catholic Traditional Movement (CTM), the Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement (ORCM), the St. Pius X Society (SSPX) — and any remaining LibTrad pseudo-clergy issue from these three organizations — ALL were founded by men later linked to the exact same secret society: the Knights of St. John Jerusalem. And now we have shown that the ORCM was intertwined with a Masonic-run organization from the outset. Any so-called clerics were excommunicated for cooperating in any way with these apostates, and any Traditionalists joining “Fr.” James Wathen’s Solemn Order of St. John of Jerusalem were excommunicated for joining a secret society. Wathen claimed in his Is the Order of St. John Masonic that the order was not aligned with Freemasonry, but it was secret in nature, never sanctioned by a reigning pope, and therefore did not have to be directly aligned to qualify as a forbidden secret society.
The link HERE explains that it was indeed a secret society populated by former WWII generals and other military personnel directing “underground armies.” Some have claimed these armies exist both in Europe and the U.S. Fidelity Magazine writer, Thomas Case, reported in the 1990s that the SSPX in St. Mary’s, Kansas was a neo-Nazi hotbed, and much of this seems to be directly traceable to the SOSJ (see HERE). LibTrads have been warned before, but the preponderance of evidence is now firmly stacked against them. The length, depth and breadth of the infiltration of the Church is something that is almost unbelievable, but the popes warned us long ago it was occurring and no one heeded their warnings or obeyed them. God warned the Israelites in Leviticus 26 about what would befall them if they broke His Covenant and disobeyed Him. (The whole chapter should be read) Sadly, we reap what we sow.
by T. Stanfill Benns | Aug 15, 2024 | New Blog
+Feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary+
An article written in June has been submitted for comment by a reader from a Novus Ordo site called Canon Law Made Easy. The Canon Law referred to on that site is the false revision of the 1917 Code issued in 1983 by the usurper John Paul 2. This revision was first suggested by Angelo Roncalli before the first session of the false Vatican 2 council. In the Novus Ordo article, statements are made and links provided regarding the “schismatic” sedevacantist position and the false basis for this position. Of course no one expects members of this non-Catholic sect to get anything right, regardless of their supposed canon law credentials. But the points they use to deflect enquirers from sedevacantism need to be addressed, since they predictably fail to inform their readers that they do after all have the obligation to diligently research the legitimacy of the 1958 election and form their conscience accordingly.
The revised 1983 “code”
Abp. Amleto Cicognani observed that changes to the law are odious and are to be made sparingly. Revs. Woywod-Smith state under Can. 22 that “Changes in the law are made solely by the Holy See, and only for serious reasons and after mature deliberation… It is a fundamental principal that the general presumption is always in favor of the old law remaining unchanged.” So if those considered doubtful “popes,” at best, change the laws, then in doubt the old laws always remain in force under Can. 6 §4. Doubt concerning the validity of these false popes suffices, for those not able to gain a more advanced degree of certainty; a doubtful pope is no pope, as St. Robert Bellarmine teaches, and as a doctor of the Church his opinion is probable according to the moral theologians. We are to use such opinions, also reflex principles whenever we have no one to consult regarding such situations. Canon 22, in the 1917 Code states: “A more recent law given by the competent authority abolishes a former law if the new law explicitly says so or if it is directly contrary to the old law or if it takes up and readjusts the entire subject matter of the former law.”
The entire question here must be asked and answered for those who have not yet done the necessary study: were Roncalli and his successors true popes, “competent authority”? Were their elections unquestionably valid? The answer to this question should be obvious, given the fruits of these imposters and what has been presented by this author and others for nearly 35 years. This is why, of course, all these objectors assume the question is preposterous, schismatic, absurd, etc. They list those who have the least likelihood of offering any credible evidence for Roncalli’s false election, the more fantastical sedevacantist proponents, to make sedevacantism appear to have little value as a tenable theory. While claiming to uphold the law, they violate it, resorting to sophisms to avoid addressing the issue, that is arguing beside the point. The elephant in the room remains very large and real while they talk around it.
They don’t even get the real jist of the issue or the sedevacantist position held by LibTrads, writing: “And since a man who isn’t validly elected Pope can’t validly select new Bishops and Cardinals, this means that subsequent Popes were chosen by non-Cardinals, meaning that the new Popes weren’t/aren’t validly elected either. So sedevacantists are basically saying that the hierarchy of the Catholic Church has pretty much ceased to exist” (June 6, 2024). Only those praying at home really believe the hierarchy has ceased to exist, in this the end times. Sedevacantist pseudo-clergy believe they are the hierarchy and can continue to function without their head bishop, the pope. The proper term, which all canonists should be familiar with, is actually canonically elected. And the real issue here is not whether the non-cardinals chose subsequent popes or a non-pope could select new bishops. The old law easily solves the problem, and if these commentators were truly competent canonists who had done their due diligence, they would know this. Canon 2391 § 1 states that a college electing an unworthy candidate is automatically disqualified from proceeding to a new election.
Certitude and matters of faith
In a link to a 2017 article, provided in the June 6, 2024, article, we read: “Canon 205 tells us that a baptized Catholic is in full communion with the Catholic Church if he accepts the Catholic faith, Catholic sacraments, and Catholic governance — and it’s the issue of rejecting church governance that is the key problem with sedevacantism. If you don’t believe that this or that papal document was issued by a man who is/was really the Pope, then you naturally don’t intend to abide by whatever it says by refusing to accept the authority of the current Pope or his recent predecessors, a Catholic who’s a sedevacantist willfully puts himself into a state of schism… But since sedevacantists tend to cite (incorrectly) a lot of canon law in support of their positions, it seems reasonable to assume that they are aware of both the Church’s position on the crime of schism, and the penalties that may accompany it…
“Sedevacantism… is a schismatic movement rather than a heretical one. As sedevacantist Catholics refuse to acknowledge the authority of the Holy Father(s), deciding for themselves that he/they are not really Pope(s), they are deliberately taking themselves out of full communion with the Church… When people take it upon themselves to decide that the Pope isn’t really the Pope because he took a sketchy theological position, or because his personal morals were scandalous, or because it looks like his election wasn’t done quite right… they’re playing with fire.”
But there is a major problem with these statements. Catholics MUST decide for themselves, for they are obligated to arrive at certitude that the man claiming to be pope was canonically elected, according to the laws prevailing at the time, NOT the revised 1983 code — the old law still prevails. Theologians unanimously teach that one cannot act in a state of doubt regarding matters concerning eternal salvation, such as obedience to a true pope, unless and until that doubt is resolved, and no one will consider ALL the evidence to resolve it. That we are bound to remove this doubt is clearly demonstrated from the binding decrees found in Henry Denzinger’s Sources of Catholic Dogma, (DZ 570d, 650, 652, 674, also Cum ex Apostolatus Officio): “A pope canonically elected, who lived for a time after having expressed his own name, is the successor of blessed Peter, having supreme authority in the Church,” (DZ 674). This is an article of faith, proposed for belief to the Armenians and to Wycliffe and the Hussites. The article proposed to the Armenians asks them to hold that “all the Roman Pontiffs who… succeeding Blessed Peter have entered canonically and will enter canonically,” will possess the same plenitude of jurisdiction Christ granted to St. Peter. Msgr. Joseph C. Fenton states that what was proposed to the Armenians is to be considered a dogma of faith, (The Concept of Sacred Theology, pgs. 132-33).
In his 1896 work Dr. Littledale’s Theory of the Disappearance of the Papacy, Sydney F. Smith, S.J. wrote: “The following passage is [found] in Ferraris Bibliotheca, a work of the highest authority. In his article on the Pope, (S.v. Papa, p. 949) [the respected theologian] Ferraris says: It is of faith that Benedict XIV, for instance, LEGITIMATELY ELECTED and accepted as such by the Church, is the true Pope (common doctrine among Catholics). This is proved from the Council of Constance, where Martin V’s Const. Inter Cunctos decrees that those who return from heresy to the faith shall be asked, among other points, ‘Whether they believe that the Pope canonically elected, for the time being, his name being expressly mentioned, is the successor of St. Peter, having supreme authority in the Church of God.’ For thereby he supposes it to be an article of faith, since those who abjure heresy are ‘interrogated only as to truths of faith.’” (See DZ 674, 675).
No schism if positive doubt established
This same article of faith is one we ourselves must believe. But if certitude cannot be had regarding the canonical status of the election, and the book The Phantom Church in Rome, also articles on this site have provided sufficient evidence for years to cast grave doubt on the results of the 1958 election, then one is bound in conscience NOT to hold such an election valid. According to the opinions of seven notable theologians, in withdrawing from the “obedience” of a man claiming to be pope who you believe was never canonically elected, no schism is involved. Vermeersch-Cruesen, Reiffenstuel, Schmalzgrueber, Ferraris, Vechiotti and Szal state: “There is no schism involved… if one refuses obedience [to a pope] inasmuch as one suspects the person of the Pope or the validity of his election…” (The Communication of Catholics with Schismatics, Rev. Ignatius J. Szal, A.B., J.C.L.). Serious reasons, that is positive doubt, must exist and proofs must be presented to support such a position. This fulfills the provisions of Can. 20 and establishes probability according to Church teaching. These theologians agree that one need only suspect that the man claiming to be Pope is irregular in some way or invalidly elected (Can. 2200), and we have established far more than just suspicion in the documents presented on this subject.
And then we have the probable opinion of St. Robert Bellarmine, who teaches a doubtful pope is no pope: “When there is a prudent doubt about the validity of an election to any official position, there also is a similar doubt whether the person so elected really has authority or not. In such a case, no one is bound to obey him… But a superior whom no one is bound to obey is in reality no superior at all… An authority that may be justly doubted at all times is no authority; it commands neither obedience nor respect as is evident in churches that reject the claim to indefectibility… One who intrudes himself into the ministry against the laws of the Church receives no authority, and consequently can transmit none to his successors…
“Therefore,” continues the Cardinal, “If a papal election is really doubtful for any reason, the one elected should resign, so that a new election may be held. But if he refuses to resign, it becomes the duty of the bishops to adjust the matter, for although the bishops without the pope cannot define dogmas nor make laws for the universal Church, they can and ought to decide, when occasion demands, who is the legitimate pope; and if the matter be doubtful, they should provide for the Church by having a legitimate and undoubted pastor elected. That is what the Council of Constance rightly did.” (Rev. E.S. Berry, The Church of Christ: “p. 402).
St. Antoninus, commenting on the Great Western Schism, also noted: “The question was much discussed and much was written in defense of one side or the other. For as long as the schism lasted each obedience had in its favor men who were very learned in Scripture and Canon Law, and even very pious people, including some who – what is much more – were illustrious by the gift of miracles. Nonetheless the question could never be settled without leaving the minds of many still in doubt. Doubtless we must believe that, just as there are not several Catholic Churches, but only one, so there is only one Vicar of Christ who is its pastor. But if it should occur that, by a schism, several popes are elected at the same time, it does not seem necessary for salvation to believe that this or that one in particular is the true pope, but just in general whichever of them was canonically elected. The people are not obliged to know who was canonically elected, just as they are not obliged to know Canon Law; in this matter they may follow the judgment of their superiors and prelates.” And the superiors and prelates WE follow are those writing before the death of Pope Pius XII.
Another respected theologian weighs in here: “A doubtful pope may be really invested with the requisite power, but he has not practically in the Church the same right as a certain pope — he is not entitled to be acknowledged as Head of the Church, and may be legitimately compelled to desist from his claim,” (The Relations of the Church to Society — Theological Essays, Rev. Edmund James O’Reilly, S.J., emph. his.) Rev. O’Reilly was the theologian of choice in Ireland for local Irish Councils and Synods and was a professor of theology. The opinion of these men and the proofs that the 1958 election was invalid also constitutes the juridical certainty in way of evidence required by Dom Charles Augustine under Can. 430. What Szal presents, then, is a solidly probable opinion, one which helps establish certitude, and according to the laws and teachings of the Church it may be followed at will.
So those among LibTrads holding John 23 as validly elected and the Novus Ordo “experts” who criticize others for misquoting Canon Law and accuse them of willfully committing schism are asking Catholics to actually ignore their conscience and deny an article of faith. Furthermore they have entirely argued beside the point regarding the question, refusing to consider evidence that amply shows there were numerous alarming irregularities and evidence of outside election interference in 1958. These facts have been available for years, even decades. Pretending to be champions of Canon Law, they entirely discount and ignore the canons then in effect which have been cited here numerous times. But most importantly, they entirely dismiss Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis, which infallibly voids any attempted act or acts contrary to those canons, and levies penalties for violations of his law that could be lifted only by a future canonically elected pope. This renders their reasoning and their arguments null and void.
Peter’s faith lacking in Roncalli, Montini
We read above from this NO site that: “Canon 205 [1983 code] tells us that a baptized Catholic is in full communion with the Catholic Church if he accepts the Catholic faith, Catholic sacraments, and Catholic governance… it’s the issue of rejecting church governance that is the key problem with sedevacantism.” No, the issue of Church governance and unchanging faith is the key problem with ALL LibTrad and Novus Ordo sects. The Church was founded on a rock — on PETER’S FAITH. It was not founded on fractured rock or sand. Both Cum ex Apostolatus Officio and Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis exclude heretics or suspected heretics from election and Roncalli was a proven suspected heretic (see HERE). And the Catholic Encyclopedia tells us: “Of course, the election of a heretic, schismatic, or female would be null and void.” Neither Roncalli or Montini were loyal to Pope Pius XII or retained that same faith. His governance meant nothing to them; they were working together and with others to establish a new church, and they succeeded. Many instances have been cited proving they questioned or denied the faith; Vatican 2 and the Novus Ordo Missae proved that most effectively. Montini and Roncalli were Catholics in name only. But how do you make an objective judgment in this case when the man falsely elected has been declared a “saint”?!!
Dr. Cyril Andrade wrote in a 1976 article, Are Papal Elections Inspired by the Holy Ghost?”: “Pius XII is pope: Montini is his pro-secretary of State: Roncalli is Papal Nuncio in Paris: the Pope suppresses the “Worker Priest” movement in France because far from reclaiming the workers to the Church, all of the 200 “Worker Priests”, themselves, lost their faith; but Montini and Roncalli, in collusion, secretly encourage the movement and keep it alive against the order of the Pope.” After explaining how both the elections of Roncalli and Montini were secretly engineered by Freemasons and others, Andrade writes: “Does this scenario of low, vile intrigue, connivance, collusion and treachery of the hierarchical mafia led by the liberal (heretical) gang of Suenens, König, Döpfner, Lercaro, et al, in any way lend credence to the canard that the Conclave that elected [Roncalli and] Montini was “secret” and “inspired by the Holy Ghost”?
“To thus make a mockery of the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, in this vile fashion, is to be guilty of the unforgivable sin. But, then, the Vatican II Mafia does not believe that the Holy Ghost is God for, in the fourth Eucharistic prayer which they have concocted for their Novus Ordo Missae (New Mass) they state categorically: “Father in heaven, you alone are God . . .” (Emphases added), thus excluding the Son and the Holy Ghost from the Trinity Godhead.” And these Novus Ordo pretenders can dismiss these heresies and proofs that faith is lacking, in Francis AND his predecessors, to accuse sedevacantists of schism and rejection of lawful authority? Please see the article HERE which confirms what Andrade wrote so long ago.
And not only must the one elected as pope be considered here but the ones electing as well. As Andrade notes and Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis states, the cardinals are tasked to select who they believe is the worthiest among them to act as Christ’s vicar. Those making this selection must certainly be Catholic themselves. Yet we see that all those cardinals who participated in Roncalli’s election, minus those who had the good fortune to pass away, went on to convene and approve the deliberations of the false Vatican 2 council. And they were good Catholics, they can be trusted and we have no reason to doubt them? How could anyone be so blind? A canonical election requires that all those voting be Catholics who have not automatically forfeited their office owing to some heresy. Ecumenism is a heresy; religious liberty is a heresy; the insertion into missalettes distributed in 1959 containing the English translation, “for all men,” is a heresy. If only a few cardinals could be proven to be suspect of heresy, or disobedient to the pope or to have participated in plots to confirm Roncalli as pope before Pope Pius XII’s death, and there is proof of this, Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis declares the election is invalid for want of a two-thirds plus one vote.
Peter’s faith is the rock, and without it the entire foundation that is the papacy crumbles. Does any true Catholic really believe that the Holy Ghost would descend upon and grant the gift of infallibility to a man suspected of heresy for over 25 years, elected by men, some of whom were complicit in rigging the election, with assistance from the CIA and other groups? Canon Law and pre-1958 canonists deny the election would be valid. Pope Pius XII declares in his infallible Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis that anything done in violation of the sacred canons during an interregnum is null and void. Common sense and any reverence for the institution of the papacy should tell us that such an election is doubtful in the extreme, especially considering what went before compared to what followed. It would convince a rational person, if we were dealing with truly rational human beings identifying as Catholic. But sadly this is not the case today. Pray that the veil be lifted from their eyes and the hardness be driven from their hearts.
by T. Stanfill Benns | Aug 10, 2024 | New Blog
+St. Lawrence, Martyr+
A sad form of rigorism still seems to be afoot that would deny those converting towards the end of their lives the hope of salvation. In his classic work Sinners Return to God, written in 1897, Rev. Michael Mueller calls out to the hardened sinner to return to the God who gave joy to his youth, the religion into which he was received or was born. It is often quoted as proof that deathbed repentance or “conversion” is not something favored by the Church, as Rev. Mueller points out, and this is very true concerning the state of certainly baptized Catholics who were raised in the faith and later abandoned it, Catholics who have stubbornly delayed their return to the Church. Of such errant Catholics Rev. Nicholas Walsh, S. J., says in his 1898 work, The Saved and the Lost:
“It may sound harsh and seem strange to say that there is a class of persons who appear to be in greater danger of being lost than the pagan or negative infidel, the grossly ignorant or the simple followers of sects and schisms: namely heretics and schismatics of the educated class. These, as a rule, by profession and education, know much of Holy Scripture and reference it as the word of God; believe in most if not all the fundamental truths of Christianity; are not ignorant of history and live in countries where the Catholic Church is carrying on Her mission. The danger would also seem to increase in proportion to their education, knowledge and nearness to the Church. They know too much and have gone too far not to have the thought forced on them that they should learn a little more and go a little further. It is scarcely possible that such persons have not, from time to time, some misgivings as to their religious position and that light is not almost forced on them as to the paramount claims of the Catholic Church.”
So often the mistake is made today of believing that what is said of those assumed to be validly baptized Catholics now applies to the majority of those simply professing to be Catholic. Some of these may or may not be validly baptized; some may assume they have been sufficiently educated in the faith when in fact they have been grossly misled or propagandized to an extent almost impossible to reverse. These are the grossly ignorant or blind followers of LibTrad and other sects. But there are yet others, and not a few, who have a greater knowledge of Holy Scripture and matters of faith who choose to mislead or be misled and to ignore the warnings that they are not properly drawing out conclusions from what they know and therefore are leading others astray. These are the souls, who, if they do not turn from their evil ways, are in grave danger of perishing as unrepentant sinners.
The grossly ignorant or the simple followers of sects and schisms are not guiltless but are not as harshly judged, for they have followed either the bad example of their relatives or followed LibTrad pseudo-clergy. And there are various classes of individuals peculiar to our times who are seldom considered here but are frequently misclassified as insincerely repentant on their death. These are the unbaptized, those raised with little thought at all of God; who knew little or nothing of the Catholic faith, even though they may have been validly baptized. Also included here are those converted and baptized only shortly before death and those suffering from mental illness; or physical illness that profoundly impacts their mental capacity. And yet those calling themselves Catholic seem to feel no compunction in including such individuals alongside the certainly baptized and those enjoying the use of a sound mind, something Canon Law and Church teaching certainly does not support.
As an example, consider the case of an individual who feels attracted by the Catholic faith, even in these sad times. Perhaps they have friends or relatives who they believe are Catholic; or maybe they have been influenced by some profound event that makes them sympathetic to the faith. Let us say they are great sinners, addicted to certain vices they fight, but are not able to overcome. But without the grace of true conversion or Baptism, how are they able to overcome them without the prayers of the Catholics they know and their loved ones, should they be Catholic? And even with such prayers, as the great catechist Rev. John Kearney teaches in his Our Greatest Treasure, “…the difficulty in making the final step” to conversion, a pain-filled journey that often took even the best educated non-Catholics literally “years” to complete, is very difficult. “Hence the necessity of a very strong grace,” and who among us are worthy of declaring when God might grant this grace and to whom?
Is it not a miracle that without a visible Church, without confessors, the Holy Sacrifice and the Sacraments, anyone is ever attracted to the faith today at all? How much easier was repentance and conversion, when all one needed to do was approach the priest for instruction or the Sacrament of Penance! In this welter of confusion today, where even “Catholics” cannot agree on what comprises the truths of faith, is it any wonder that so few manage to find their way to the truth? Readers of this will readily acknowledge that their own journey to the faith, if witnessed by one secretly drawn to it, would possibly have done more to alienate such potential converts than to attract and encourage them, what with all the running around to errant LibTrad sects and doctrinal deformity that ensued. This certainly is not the good example and practice of the Catholic faith such timid and often tortured souls need to make that final, difficult step to conversion.
Hope for the dying
If not for the following words from A Golden Key of Heaven for All Good Christian People by Rev. T. Von Den Driesch (1904), the very possibility of deathbed conversions without a priest present would be denied.
“With the grace of God, perfect contrition is attainable by all who have good will; for it is in the will, not the feeling. Perfect contrition is often confounded with a supposed greatest intensity of sorrow; but perfect contrition has degrees and stages, and it need not be the highest and the most intense, such as that of St. Peter, or St. Mary Magdalen, or St. Aloysius. A much lower degree of perfect contrition effects the forgiveness of sin. To give you confidence in your ability to make acts of perfect contrition, remember that for many thousand years before the time of our Lord, in the Old Law, perfect contrition was the only means whereby men could obtain forgiveness of sins and [prepare] to enter Heaven. Catholic soul, you have so many more graces and are better instructed. I maintain that you often have perfect contrition, without knowing it or thinking of it; for example, while making the Way of the Cross, while contemplating a crucifix or a picture of the Sacred Heart, etc. Furthermore, you can express ardent love and heartfelt sorrow in a few words, provided you have the proper intention and motive, namely the love of God: “My God and my All!”‘ My Jesus, mercy!”; “God be merciful to me, a sinner!” God has given perfect contrition the power to produce such excellent effects; therefore He desires us to excite ourselves to it and He will help us to do so. “He wills not the death of the sinner, but that he live and be converted.”
Regarding even unbaptized adults, the 1929 work by Rev. Edwin G. Kaiser, C.PP.S, Our Spiritual Service to the Sick and Dying, instructs us as follows: “Those who are not Catholic should be helped in their last moments. If they are unbaptized and are willing to believe all the Church teaches, we may and must baptize them. If it is not sure that they have been properly baptized, we baptize them conditionally. If the person is well disposed but there is reason to fear he does not want to join the Church; if mentioning the Catholic Church will only disturb him and endanger the work of saving his soul, we may proceed in this manner: recite with him the Apostles Creed, or if this is too much, ask him if he believes in Jesus who is God and came to save us by his death on the Cross. If he believes in Christ and the three Divine Persons and is ready to believe all that Christ wants him to believe in, to do all that God wants and is sorry for offending God, then we can and should baptize him. Or if we can do no more, we can at least induce him to make an act of love for Jesus.”
So deathbed repentance is still possible and may be even more common today than in the past. Is it not in accordance with God’s mercy that he would assist those who are truly sorry even at the end of their life with the necessary graces, seeing how this was already true before the loss of Mass, Sacraments and the papacy? Why send priests to prisons to absolve the worst criminals if such conversion is not a distinct possibility? Below we find the comments of the theologians on this attitude toward deathbed conversions.
Conformity in death to God’s will
“Ignorant, then, are they of human nature, and of God, who deride death-bed conversions, as though they must needs be insincere. Who knows what astounding shiftings of the personality may not, at that unique moment, and in unplumbed depths of the self, take place — nay, even, one would say, must take place in the all-but-discarnate soul, or have the chance of taking place? Foolish are they who sneer at the anxious effort of the Church, and her eager giving of the sacraments even to the seemingly unconscious, or to the hardened sinner if but there be some symptom that his will has become susceptible of their effects; or even, it may be, short of that, you may almost suppose that in the interior soul that divine mysterious recognition and embrace is happening, which by no exterior symptom can express itself.
“Here, then, you must remember that the forgiveness of sins is an article of our Creed. Here is no arbitrary condemnation in mid-life; no fatal mechanistic series; no Karma, even. There is only one complete, irreversible soul-suicide, the act of dying with the will rebellious against God’s. After all, man is limited. The soul, I said, has an appetite for the infinite; yet not infinite is the soul. It is conceivable that the soul may so pour itself out into an act of knowledge, that it can do no more; it has become its knowledge; it is its own act; time exists no more for it. So, too, it is conceivable that a soul may, as it were, exhaust itself in an act of will: it has fully expressed itself in its choice; it is that will, then; the soul may make itself what is opposed to God. That gigantic act may indeed occur; it is an evil self; it is its own worst hell.
“But this carries us beyond the juridical aspect of the problem on which these “moral” difficulties are based. From the side of man they disappear if it be recalled that man, if he finds himself “in hell,” has put himself there. No Calvinist predestination is ours. “This is the will of God, your sanctification. God wills that all men should be saved.”
“And on God’s side we have to recall that in him all is one—mercy, justice, power, love. Only our limited, inexhaustive, analyzing intellect sets these “attributes” as it were one against the other. He cannot defeat his mercy by his justice, nor justice by mercy; both are knowledge: in all he is being true to himself; his action is his self; he alone is, in the full sense, his self. No deviation from the true right is possible, on his part, without his ceasing to be God. This we know unerringly. Of the moral aspect of what we know we judge; and in human verdicts is room for almost every error. (Fr. C. C. Martindale, S.J., God and the Supernatural, 1954, Catholic Book Club.)
Deathbed conversion
“Deathbed conversion, however difficult, is still possible. Even when we see no sign of contrition, we can still not affirm that, at the last moment, just before the separation of soul from body, the soul is definitively obstinate. A sinner may be converted at that last-minute in such fashion that God alone can know it. The holy Cure of Ars, divinely enlightened, said to a weeping widow: “Your prayer, Madame, has been heard. Your husband is saved. When he threw himself into the Rhone, the Blessed Virgin obtained for him the grace of conversion just before he died. Recall how, a month before, in your garden, he plucked the most beautiful rose and said to you, ‘Carry this to the altar of the Blessed Virgin.’ She has not forgotten.”
“Other souls, too, have been converted in extremis, souls that could barely recall a few religious acts in the course of their life. A sailor, for example, preserved the practice of uncovering his head when he passed before a church. He did not know even the Our Father or the Hail Mary, but the lifting of his hat kept him from departing definitively from God.
“In the life of the saintly Bishop Bertau of Tulle, friend of Louis Veuillot, a poor girl in that city, who had once been chanter in the cathedral, fell first into misery, then into misconduct, and finally became a public sinner. She was assassinated at night, in one of the streets of Tulle. Police found her dying and carried her to a hospital. While she was dying, she cried out: “Jesus, Jesus.” Could she be granted Church burial? The Bishop answered: “Yes, because she died pronouncing the name of Jesus. But bury her early in the morning without incense.” In the room of this poor woman was found a portrait of the holy Bishop, on the back of which was written: “The best of Fathers.” Fallen though she was, she still recognized the holiness of her bishop and preserved in her heart the memory of the goodness of Our Lord.
“A certain licentious writer, Armand Sylvestre, promised his mother when she was dying to say a Hail Mary every day. He kept his promise. Out of the swamp in which he lived, he daily lifted up to God this one little flower. Pneumonia brought him to the hospital, served by religious, who said to him: “Do you wish a priest?” “Certainly,” he answered. And he received absolution, probably with sufficient attrition [imperfect contrition], through a special grace obtained for him by the Blessed Mother, though we can hardly doubt he underwent a long and heavy Purgatory.
“Another French writer, Adolphe Rette, shortly after his conversion, which was sincere and profound, was struck by a sentence he read in the visitors’ book of the Carmelite Convent: “Pray for those who will die during the Mass at which you are going to assist.” He did so. Some days later he fell grievously ill, and was confined to bed in the hospital at Beaune, for many years, up to his death. Each morning he offered all his sufferings for those who would die during the day. Thus he obtained many deathbed conversions. We shall see in Heaven how many conversions there are in the world, owing to such prayers.
“In the life of St. Catherine of Siena we read of the conversion of two great criminals. The Saint had gone to visit one of her friends. As they heard, in the street below, a loud noise, her friend looked through the window. Two condemned men were being led to execution. Their jailers were tormenting them with nails heated red-hot, while the condemned men blasphemed and cried. St. Catherine, inside the house, fell to prayer, with her arms extended in the form of a cross. At once the wicked men ceased to blaspheme and asked for a confessor. People in the street could not understand this sudden change. They did not know that a nearby Saint had obtained this double conversion.
“Several years ago the chaplain in a prison in Nancy had the reputation of converting all criminals whom he had accompanied to the guillotine. On one occasion he found himself alone, shut up with an assassin who refused to go to Confession before death. The cart, with the condemned man, passed before the sanctuary of Our Lady of Refuge. The old chaplain prayed: “Remember, O most gracious Virgin Mary, that never was it known that anyone who had recourse to thy intercession was abandoned. Convert this criminal of mine: otherwise I will say that it has been heard that you have not heard.” At once the criminal was converted.
“Return to God is always possible, up to the time of death, but it becomes more and more difficult as hard-heartedness grows. Let us not put off our conversion. Let us say every day a Hail Mary for the grace of a happy death” (written by the renowned theologian Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange in his Life Everlasting, 1852, Herder Books, https://archive.org/details/lifeeverlasting0000garr/page/n5/mode/2up ).
Life Stories of Dying Penitents, (P. J. Kenedy, 1892), by a missionary priest is yet another example of God’s mercies, even to hardened sinners. No one is saying that all these individuals are certainly saved, or that they will be spared punishment in Purgatory. That is for God alone to determine. But no one should, as some seem to believe, discount the mercy of God at the hour of death if a sinner exhibits or has previously exhibited signs of repentance. That is Jansenism and rigorism in its most dangerous form. Let us instead every day say some prayer for the dying, that they may be spared the pains of hell and may find their way to that place of comfort, light and peace where we all long to be.
